# Matched vs Nonmatched Placebos in a Randomized Trial of COVID-19 Treatments

## TL;DR

This study finds that using nonmatched placebos in COVID-19 treatment trials does not bias results compared to matched placebos.

## Contribution

The study is the first to systematically examine nonmatched placebo bias in infectious disease trials, specifically for COVID-19.

## Key findings

- No significant difference was observed between matched and nonmatched placebo groups in treatment effectiveness.
- Nonmatched placebos may improve statistical power and reduce implementation barriers in future trials.
- Findings suggest matched placebos may not always be necessary in infectious disease studies.

## Abstract

In COVID-19 randomized clinical trials, is use of nonmatched placebo groups associated with bias in comparative efficacy results?

In this comparative effectiveness research including 2684 patients across 7 treatments in a single randomized clinical trial, no significant difference between matched and nonmatched placebo populations for comparative effectiveness was observed in both adjusted and unadjusted scenarios.

The findings of this study suggest that future studies of a similar design and therapeutic context may not necessitate matched placebo analysis only.

Matched placebo interventions are complex and resource intensive. Recent evidence suggests matched placebos may not always be necessary. Previous studies have predominantly evaluated potential bias of nonmatched placebos (ie, differing on dose, frequency of administration, or formulation) in pain and mental health, but to date no systematic examination has been conducted in infectious disease.

To test for differences between nonmatched and matched placebo arms with respect to clinical outcome measures across multiple therapeutics for COVID-19.

In a comparative effectiveness research study, a post hoc analysis was conducted of data on individual patients enrolled in a large, multiarm, platform randomized clinical trial in symptomatic adult outpatients with COVID-19 between January 15, 2021, to September 28, 2023, in which the outcomes of both matched and nonmatched placebo groups were reported. Bayesian and frequentist covariate-adjusted techniques were compared with 7 intervention-placebo pairs.

Seven matched and nonmatched placebo pairs (for a total of 7 comparisons) were evaluated throughout the primary platform trial. Comparisons were made between treatment and its associated matched (concurrent) placebo, as well as with nonmatched placebo (alone and in combination) assessed at a similar time point.

Outcomes assessed included hospitalizations, EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-level scores, and PROMIS Global-10 scores.

A total of 7 intervention-control pairs (N = 2684) were assessed, including 1620 (60.4%) women, with mean (SD) age, 47 (15.2) years; the most common comorbidities were obesity (41.9%) and hypertension (37.9%). In a meta-analysis with decoupled SEs, accounting for overlapping placebo patients, the overall odds ratio (OR) of nonmatched compared with matched placebo was 1.01 (95% credible interval, 0.77-1.32), with posterior probability of equivalence, defined as 0.8 ≤ OR ≤ 1.2 (a deviation from perfect equivalence ie, OR = 1, by no more than 0.2) of 85.4%, implying no significant difference. Unadjusted analysis of the event rate difference between all nonmatched and matched placebo groups did not identify any notable differences across all 7 treatment-placebo combinations assessed. Similar analysis that was conducted for patient-reported quality of life outcomes did not yield statistically significant differences.

In this post hoc study of a randomized clinical platform trial, pooling matched and nonmatched placebo patient data did not lead to inconsistencies in treatment effect estimation for any of the investigational drugs. These findings may have significant implications for future platform trials, as the use of nonmatched placebo may improve statistical power, or reduce barriers to placebo implementation.

This comparative effectiveness study examines data from randomized clinical trials on use of nonmatched vs matched placebos in treatment of COVID-19.